Mur Lafferty's videos on companions can be seen here.
The game will also be distributed via GOG.com; the relevant quote on this:

We're happy to announce that we've talked with the GOG.com crew and they've let us know that they would love to distribute Torment! They will be one of your options to download your digital DRM-free copies. (They'll also be a place to get Wasteland 2 DRM-free.)

Given how much attention their 2 games have received and their plans to provide Linux versions I wonder how that may affect GOG both specifically regarding the games and more generally.

--

I'd just like to interject here and point out that I'm not going to say anything to spoil the mood, Chief. I'll just float here and watch. Don't mind me, just sitting here, floating and watching, that's me.

For anyone curious about how combat will be handled (ie. TB vs. RTWP), I received a reply from the developers:

We have several design goals for combat that aren’t inherently dependent upon whether the combat is RTwP, TB, or something else. These include aspects such as meaningful player decisions at both the strategic and tactical levels; emphasizing quality of combat encounters over quantity (including the ability to avoid the majority of combat through gameplay decisions); the integration of narrative elements (the spirit eating mechanic of Mask of the Betrayer is an example of this.)

Because we can achieve these goals with either system, and because we don’t feel that the choice of RTwP or TB is fundamental to the Torment experience, it is exactly the type of design decision in which we’ll want to engage the game’s backers.

I find this answer irritating, as if I were being chided for caring about the combat. The fact that combat isn't the focus of the game doesn't mean the question is irrelevant, nor can it be denied there is a qualitative difference between the two. But of course they can do what they want.

Originally Posted by screeg
I find this answer irritating, as if I were being chided for caring about the combat. The fact that combat isn't the focus of the game doesn't mean the question is irrelevant, nor can it be denied there is a qualitative difference between the two. But of course they can do what they want.

Sorry if it was irritating. That was me replying (based on an explanation Kevin Saunder offered on Formspring to this question), I'll try to phrase it better in the future. The intent is in no way to dismiss it as irrelevant, in fact improving combat compared to PS:T is very important, it's one of the first things Kevin brought up to me when we started talking about this project, but rather this is a design question where we do see an opportunity to engage in backer feedback because there are multiple possible systems that hit our design goals. Colin talked about this a bit more here.